I have repeatedly and ACCURATELY described the Port-of-Entry procedures which lead to the issuance of a Departure Order by a Minister's Delegate: Again, it goes like this:
Referral to PoE Secondary => PoE Secondary officer issues 44(1) Report => Another officer (authorized to act as a "Minister's Delegate") reviews the Report and interviews the PR, and issues the Departure Order => PR is allowed to enter Canada (Departure Order is NOT enforceable for at least 30 days) => if PR appeals, that goes directly to the IAD, that is the Immigration Appeal Division (NOT to IRCC or even the "Immigration Division")
The procedure for other grounds of inadmissibility is different. That said, those procedures can also START with issuance of a 44(1) Report.
Of course PRs determined to be inadmissible due to serious criminality or security grounds can be issued a Removal Order and Deported from Canada.
Eventually. BUT THAT IS NOT DONE by a MINISTER'S DELEGATE attendant a PoE examination. The Minister's Delegate ONLY has authority to make a removal order (to issue a Departure Order) for a PR "
in the case of a permanent resident who is inadmissible solely on the grounds that they have failed to comply with the residency obligation under section 28." In respect to other 44(1) Reports transmitted to the Minister (again, in practice this just means another border officer who has authorization to act as a "Minister's Delegate") regarding PRs (authority as to Foreign Nationals is more extensive), "
if the Minister is of the opinion that the report is well-founded, the Minister may refer the report to the Immigration Division for an admissibility hearing." This is spelled out in Section 44(2) IRPA.
This is also clearly described in the Enforcement Manuals. For example, Section 3.6 (page 11) in ENF 6 "Review of reports under A44(1)" where it states:
The Minister's delegate is given the power to issue removal orders against permanent residents only in cases where the sole basis for removal is loss of permanent resident status due to the inability to comply with the requirements of A28. In such cases, a departure order will be issued. The power of the Minister's delegate does not extend to the loss of permanent resident status on other grounds.
This is also described in ENF 3 "Admissibility Hearings and Detention Review Proceedings" in Section 8.1 on page 11; and also see Section 11.4 in ENF 4 "Port of Entry Examinations" Section 11.4 on page 36
(Reminder: the "Minister's Delegate" is NOT the same thing as the "Minister's counsel.")
NOTE, as well, if officers at a PoE determine a returning PR is inadmissible for serious criminality, on security grounds, or otherwise poses a danger to the public,
the PR may be detained. In such cases, the Minister has a mandate to forthwith make the referral to the Immigration Division, whose responsibility it will be to hold an admissibility hearing.
KEY SOURCES -- Official Law Sources:
KEY SOURCES -- For official Interpretation and application of law Sources, these can be readily found and researched at
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/ where one can limit the scope of searches to just the IAD, or for access to Federal Court decisions see
https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/en/0/ann.do
Note, I have previously cited and linked multiple officially published accounts of actual cases which illustrate precisely the procedure I have described repeatedly here.
KEY SOURCES -- Operational Manuals
While the Operational Manuals are not always up-to-date and they are guidelines not definitive statements of law, they offer the best overall outline about how these things work. And they cite the applicable statutory provisions and regulations. There are links to pdf versions of the Enforcement Manuals at the IRCC website; see
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals.html
These manuals are particularly useful if researched in conjunction with the statutory provisions, IAD decisions, and reliable anecdotal reports from forum participants such as
@Bentham
I have referenced these before. For the issues discussed here the more relevant manuals are:
ENF 1 Inadmissibility
ENF 3 Admissibility Hearings and Detention Review Proceedings
ENF 4 Port of Entry Examinations
ENF 5 Writing 44(1) Reports
ENF 6 Review of reports under subsection A44(1)
ENF 23 Loss of Permanent Resident Status
Beyond that I feel as though I am beating a dead horse. I have described, for PRs in breach of the PR RO arriving at a PoE, how the process works. That is what happened for
@Bentham and that is what happened in three OFFICIAL accounts of ACTUAL cases I cited and gave you links for in other posts, which I provided as simply examples among scores of others in the published IAD decisions. And that is the procedure outlined in the Enforcement Operational Manuals I have previously cited and reference above.
Again, as for other grounds of inadmissibility, the procedure is different. Of course PRs determined to be inadmissible for any of the other grounds (misrepresentation; serious criminality; security) can be issued a Departure Order. BUT NOT by a Minister's Delegate attendant a PoE examination. If a PR returning to Canada is identified as and determined to be inadmissible for these grounds, a 44(1) Report can be issued and then the matter is referred to IRCC which will conduct an admissibility hearing. This is also clearly outlined in the respective Enforcement Operation Manuals, ENF 3 and ENF 4 in particular. AND the PR may be kept in custody pending an admissibility hearing. (Section 55(3) IRPA) The procedures in these cases is likewise outlined in the respective Enforcement Operation Manuals, ENF 3 and ENF 4 in particular. Again, this procedure is different that the procedure for PRs deemed inadmissible for a breach of the RO.